ITALY APPRENTICESHIP REVIEW

(1)

EN

A P P R E N T I C E S H I P R E V I E W

Building education and training opportunities

through apprenticeships

(2)

(3)

(4)

ITALY

(5)

Building education and training

opportunities through

apprenticeships

THEMATIC COUNTRY REVIEWS

Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union, 2017

Apprenticeship review

ITALY

(6)

Photo Peter Elovich and Susanna Pozzoli © Fondazione Cologni dei Mestieri d’Arte.

The project “Una Scuola, un Lavoro. Percorsi di Eccellenza” promotes and supports internships for young artisans. Designed by Missing Element Prague

Printed in the European Union

Please cite this publication as:

Cedefop (2017). Apprenticeship review: Italy.

Building education and training opportunities through apprenticeships.

Luxembourg: Publications Office. Thematic country reviews.

A great deal of additional information on the European Union is available on the Internet.

It can be accessed through the Europa server (http://europa.eu). Luxembourg:

Publications Office of the European Union, 2017 PRINT ISBN: 978-92-896-2513-5 doi: 10.2801/0216 TI-07-17-105-EN-C PDF ISBN: 978-92-896-2514-2 doi: 10.2801/63364 TI-07-17-105-EN-N

(7)

The European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training (Cedefop) is the European Union’s

reference centre for vocational education and training. We provide information on and analyses of vocational education and training systems, policies, research and practice.

Cedefop was established in 1975 by Council Regulation (EEC) No 337/75.

Europe 123, 570 01 Thessaloniki (Pylea), GREECE PO Box 22427, 551 02 Thessaloniki, GREECE Tel. +30 2310490111, Fax +30 2310490020 Email: info@cedefop.europa.eu www.cedefop.europa.eu

Joachim James Calleja, Director Tatjana Babrauskiene, Chair of the Governing Board

(8)

Foreword

National governments do not just want apprenticeships; they want quality apprenticeships that help address youth unemployment and skill mismatch. This is what Cedefop’s thematic country reviews (TCRs) on apprenticeships aim at supporting in the long run.

Our experience so far has been a win-win situation. Cedefop has achieved better insight into key issues in Member States while working with national authorities and social partners. Stakeholders have had the opportunity to gather together and reflect on national apprenticeship policies and practices benefiting from Cedefop expertise and technical advice. Our goal is to extend this approach to other VET sectors.

Since the launch of the European alliance for apprenticeships in 2013 and the spotlight shone on the added value of work-based learning, in particular apprenticeships, by the Directors General for VET in the Riga conclusions in 2015 (Latvian Presidency of the Council of the European Union, 2015) European stakeholders and Member States have done a lot of work to increase apprenticeship offer and quality. By June 2017, 208 pledges for apprenticeship programmes within the alliance had been made by companies and business associations, chambers of commerce, industry and crafts, social partners, regional authorities, education and training providers, youth and non-profit organisations, think tanks and research institutes. Over 200 companies are also involved through the business-led Alliance4Youth.

Cedefop launched the first TCRs on apprenticeships in 2014 to support two volunteer countries (Malta and Lithuania) in their efforts to re-establish or improve apprenticeships while increasing the knowledge base on apprenticeships at European level. Since then, Malta has launched new legislation on work-based learning and apprenticeships and Lithuania has developed an apprenticeship action plan. Between 2015 and 2017, Cedefop conducted the reviews in three more volunteer countries: Greece, Italy, and Slovenia. With this second series of publications, we make the findings available and hope that they will support the national stakeholders in strengthening their structured dialogue and joint efforts, making apprenticeships a natural choice for learners.

Cedefop’s TCR methodology relies on a participatory, evolving and iterative approach. Our interaction with stakeholders is one in which learning is reciprocal, where knowledge is challenged and revised, and

NEXT CONTENTS

(9)

7

Foreword Foreword

where participation is open and transparent. In cooperation with national stakeholders, we identified strengths and enabling factors, focused on the challenges, and developed action to help with the attractiveness and quality of apprenticeships. The involvement of stakeholders and beneficiaries across the board has clearly shown that dialogue among the ministries and the social partners is growing, that employers and trade unions are making efforts to find common ground and that the gap between education and labour market representatives is narrowing, with both reaching out for synergies and cooperation. The ultimate beneficiary of this process is the European citizen who achieves a feasible route to employment and a better quality of life.

Cedefop’s TCRs allow all voices to be heard; hard evidence is collected from learners, schools, and companies and shared with policy-makers to enrich their understanding of workplaces before moving ahead with implementing policies. As brokers, Cedefop’s goal is to build bridges of evidence and policy orientation.

TCR is a dynamic and developmental exercise. Cedefop’s team followed policy development closely in the countries visited and will continue to do so by organising policy learning activities together with all the countries involved in the TCRs. Four more countries (Belgium-French Community, Croatia, Cyprus and Sweden) have been under review since the beginning of 2017; this is fulfilling our objective of making Cedefop’s presence in Member States relevant and closer.

We would like Cedefop to have positive impacts in Member States and for resulting experiences to drive our future work programmes. Reciprocity is what makes stakeholders stronger. One of the objectives of the TCRs is for Cedefop to learn from the countries under review and share with them the capacity that it has built over these past 42 years. During that time we have gained a significant amount of in-depth knowledge and better understanding of the situations in the countries reviewed, of the effect of the contextual factors, both historical and contemporary, and of national approaches to apprenticeships. We believe that the in-depth information gathered so far will help both the countries concerned and, through our intermediary role, other countries to reflect on their practices and implement reforms towards better apprenticeship programmes.

NEXT CONTENTS

(10)

8 Apprenticesh ip review: Italy – Building education and training opportunities through apprenticeshipsThematic country reviews

People need skills to find jobs. Quality apprenticeships are an excellent vehicle for those who are prepared to learn and earn a living on their own. Cedefop will continue to be at the forefront of support Member States and social partners in creating structures for learning to work.

Joachim James Calleja

Director

(11)

9

Acknowledgements

Acknowledgements

This publication was produced by Cedefop, Department for learning and employability, under the supervision of Antonio Ranieri. Ramona David and Lisa Rustico, Cedefop experts, were responsible for the publication and research conducted from July 2015 to July 2017 under the Thematic country reviews

on apprenticeships project.

Cedefop would like to acknowledge the Fondazione Giacomo Brodolini research team who conducted preliminary analysis and drafted their findings under project team leader Bert-Jan Buiskool and national expert Alberto Vergani.

Special thanks are also due to the members of the steering group, who actively participated in validation meetings to discuss project findings.

(12)

List of tables, boxes and figures

Tables

1. Number of interviews, by stakeholder group 30

2. Italy: enterprises by number of employees: number of enterprises; number of persons employed; value added; innovative enterprises 37

3. Type 1 legal framework before and after the 2015 reform, by area of

Cedefop’s analytical framework 50

4. Number of apprenticeship employment relationships per typology

and geographic area (2014 and 2015) 55

NEXT CONTENTS

(14)

5. Simulation of the distribution of Type 1 activities and number

of hours 62

6. Roles and responsibilities of the main institutional actors 69

7. Working groups and committees with Type 1

implementation mandate 74

Boxes

1. VET in Italy 15

2. The focus of the Italian TCR on apprenticeships 16

3. Logic and organisation of Type 1 19

4. Law 107/2015: reform of the State upper secondary

education system 39

5. The higher technical institutes in the Buona Scuola reform 43

6. Main steps in the legal regulation of apprenticeships in Italy 47

7. The Italian way to a ‘dual system’: a mainstreaming approach 49

8. Lombardy and Veneto web survey on employer interest in

apprenticeships (any type) 85

9. Lombardy and Veneto web survey on support to employers 86

10. Lombardy and Veneto web survey on support to employers 88

11. Apprenticeship organisation approaches, EU-28 plus Iceland

and Norway 98

12. Austria: apprentice protection and social security 108

13. Training locations in Switzerland 110

14. Improving mentor competences (Germany) 111

Figures

1. Youth and adult unemployment rates in Italy and

the EU-28, 2007-16 34

2. General and vocational education graduates: employment rates in Italy and the EU-28, ages 20 to 34, 2014-16 (%) 35

(15)

13

Table of contents

Executive summary

(16)

Executive summary

This report is part of the second series of publications on thematic country reviews (TCRs) on apprenticeships (1_{); it presents the findings of the TCR}

conducted in Italy. Two more reports belong to this series and cover the reviews carried out in Greece (Cedefop, forthcoming) and Slovenia (Cedefop, 2017). The three TCRs were conducted from 2015 to 2017.

Apprenticeship was first introduced in Italy in 1955 as an employment contract for young people. It was reformed several times in the following decades, with major changes from the late 1990s, when youth employment measures started to be conceived and designed in connection to education and training policies. In 2003, apprenticeship took on the current structure it still has: three apprenticeship schemes. All apprenticeship schemes are defined as open-ended employment contracts and apprentices are fully entitled to rights and obligations of standard employees.

The 2015 reform of employment contracts (2_{) revised the legal framework}

of the three apprenticeship schemes. These had the following characteristics at the time of the review:

(a) Type 1 apprenticeship (Type 1 from here on): ‘Apprenticeship for vocational qualifications and diplomas, upper secondary education diplomas and high technical specialisation certificates’. This is for those aged 15 to 25 and may be applied to vocational education and training (VET) programmes at upper- and post-secondary levels (see Box 1). The duration of the contract (and so the duration of alternance) varies between a minimum six months and the maximum duration of the VET programme it applies to. The distribution of time between training in the education and training institution and the company is defined on one school-year basis. Besides in- and out-of-company training, Type 1 apprenticeship foresees a component of ordinary work experience. Generally, between 50% and 70% of the time is spent at school and the rest in the company;

(1_{) The first series of publications on thematic country reviews on apprenticeships includes the}

reports for Lithuania (Cedefop, 2015b) and Malta (Cedefop, 2015a).

(2_{) Legislative Decree 81/2015, 15 June 2015. More information on this decree and all other legal}

documents mentioned is available at the end of this report. NEXT CONTENTS

(17)

15

Executive summary 15

Executive summary

(b) Type 2 apprenticeship (Type 2 from here on): ‘Occupation-oriented apprenticeship’. This is a scheme outside the VET system, which leads to an occupational qualification recognised by the national sectoral collective agreement applied in the hiring company. It is for those aged 18 to 29. The minimum duration of the contract is six months and maximum three years (or five years for artisanal jobs), of which out-of-company training for basic and transversal skills covers a maximum 120 hours in total;

(c) Type 3 apprenticeship (Type 3 from here on): ‘Higher education and research apprenticeship’. This is for those aged 18 to 29 and includes two sub-types:

(i) apprenticeship for higher education and training, which leads to university degrees, including doctorates, and higher technical institute diplomas. The mode and length of training alternation varies by the programme the scheme applies to;

(ii) apprenticeship for research activities, which leads to a contractual qualification outside the education and training systems. There might be no alternation between learning venues in apprenticeships for research activities, as training outside of the company is not obligatory.

Of the three schemes, Type 1 is the one which seems to respond more closely to the criteria of Cedefop’s analytical framework for quality apprenticeships.

Box 1. VET in Italy

Vocational education and training (VET) in Italy is implemented:

• in three- and four-year programmes at the upper secondary level (Istruzione e Formazione Professionale, IeFP), and in one-year post-secondary programmes, under the responsibility of the regions;

• in five-year vocational and technical education upper secondary programmes, and two-year tertiary level programmes, under the direct responsibility of the Ministry of Education, University and Research.

Source: Cedefop.

NEXT CONTENTS

(18)

Although first introduced in 2003, the old Type 1 (3_{) never actually took}

off. Existing practices episodic in nature covered only a few thousand cases concentrated in some areas of the country. In 2015, while (old) Type 1 covered only around 3% of total apprenticeships, Type 2 covered 95.1%, with almost no territorial differences (4_{). This is why, following the latest}

reform, the main concern of policy-makers was about preconditions for effective implementation of Type 1.

In July 2015, the Italian Ministry of Labour and Social Policies (Ministero

del Lavoro e delle Politiche Sociali, MLPS) and Cedefop launched the TCR

on apprenticeships in Italy, with a focus on Type 1 (Box 2). The scope was agreed by the steering group nominated by the MLPS. The group included the MLPS itself (5_{), the Ministry of Education, University and Research}

(Ministero dell’Istruzione, dell’Università e della Ricerca, MIUR), the regions, national trade unions and employers’ associations, VET providers, and the National Institute for the Analysis of Public Policies (Istituto Nazionale

per l’Analisi delle Poliltiche Pubbliche, INAPP, formerly ISFOL). The main

objective of the TCR in Italy was to identify the necessary conditions for implementation of Type 1 at system level, and formulate possible solutions and policy recommendations.

Box 2. The focus of the Italian TCR on apprenticeships

The focus of this review is on apprenticeship Type 1 (Type 1) in Italy, as it was reformed in 2015. This scheme shares some of the features of dual system apprenticeship model, well established in countries such as Germany and Austria. It is formally linked to the education and training system; it foresees a relevant component of formal training at school or training centre, which systematically alternates with in-company formal training, and a work component at the workplace. The apprentice is contractually linked to the employer through an open-ended employment contract, which includes an individual training plan. The employer is responsible for the apprentice’s in-company training, and pays his/her remuneration.

(3_{) ‘ Old Type 1’ indicates the schemes prior to the 2015 reform; ‘Type 1’ refers to the scheme as}

per the new regulation, since June 2015 (Legislative Decree 81/2015, 15 June 2015). (4_{) The main exception is the Bolzano province where apprenticeship is mostly embedded in a}

dual-system at upper secondary level (ISFOL, 2016).

(5_{) From January 2017 the representatives of the Ministry of Labour and Social Policies were}

(19)

17

This type of scheme has existed in Italy since 2003 but its implementation remained partial, with marginal activity levels ever since. The latest reform of the apprenticeship legal framework (Legislative Decree 81/2015, 15 June 2015) placed strategic importance on Type 1, by combining work and training in a dual system.

Source: Cedefop.

1.1. Main challenges

The TCR surveys and the discussions with the steering group identified four main sets of challenges.

1.1.1. Governance

Coordination at national and regional levels, and between the two, is still under development. Implementation of Type 1 is entrusted to both the regional VET system and the State VET system. Differences in terms of governance structures and previous experience risk consolidating in Italy two separate sub-schemes of Type 1. While some of the regions have built experience since the scheme was first introduced, the State system is still at the beginning. The regional and State systems also have different ways of organising and approaching training provision: the former is decentralised, more flexible and closer to local labour markets; the latter more centralised with looser ties with the labour market.

The challenge of social partner involvement in Type 1 still deserves attention, especially at the local level. Because of the limited role that the legislation attributed to collective bargaining in relation to the old Type 1, social partner ownership of the scheme had been non-continuous or limited in the past, while their main interest was for Type 2, for which they were entitled a wider regulatory role by law.

The not fully developed and integrated governance mechanisms at national and regional levels also lead to a lack of strategic planning for Type 1 provision.

Executive summary

(20)

1.1.2. Distinguishing features

The definition of Type 1 as ‘open-ended employment contract’ raises uncertainties in relation to its real nature and prime purpose; it seems to be in contrast with the possibility for employers to terminate the contract at the end of the apprenticeship period (6_{). Employers tend to consider Type}

1 primarily as one among the available instruments for filling vacancies, according to companies’ recruitment strategies. They tend to test the potential Type 1 apprentices in advance through other tools, such as internships. Micro companies, and small and even medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), generally have a short-term planning horizon based on client orders that can fluctuate considerably over the short term. This makes it difficult, if not impossible, for micro companies and SMEs to plan accurately the number of apprentices needed each year. Two major implications need to be considered in the efforts to move Type 1 from episode to system: Type 1 proves to be relatively unattractive as a recruitment instrument for SMEs (see company involvement, below); and it proves difficult to envisage any strategic planning for Type 1 provision.

Type 1 beneficiaries are formally assigned the double status of ‘students’ and ‘full-time employees’, which often alternate in practice, rather than coexist. Employers have difficulty understanding and managing this double status. Whether and how this might be clarified may also lead to a shift in employers’ perception of Type 1.

The multiple normative sources regulating occupational health and safety for minors, their stratification and lack of coordination are a further deterrent for company engagement in Type 1. Regulations in this area might need adaptation to Type 1, since its application in practice sometimes produces results partly inconsistent with the specificities of the production processes and work organisation models of firms using it.

1.1.3. Company involvement

Type 1 introduces a strong polarisation between formal training (7_{) and work.}

This is the underlying basis of the structure of the financial incentives: no wage for external training; reduced wage for internal training; and full wage for the work component. It also raises several concerns about company involvement in Type 1. First, although statutorily defined, the term ‘formal training’ tends to be misunderstood as training in education and training institutions, rather (6_{) I.e. once the qualification or diploma is achieved.}

(7_{) Article 2 of the Interministerial Decree MLPS/MIUR of 12 October 2015 defines formal training}

(21)

19

than training that leads to the final qualification, be it outside or inside the company. Second, even if this misunderstanding was to be clarified, the question remains of what is considered ‘formal training in the company’ as opposed to work, and how to distinguish the two. Third, companies face the challenge of how to organise the presence of apprentices in the workplace, taking into account the amount and the schedule of external training, and how to combine this with work organisation and production processes. Nor are the calculations needed to divide the apprentice’s time hours among external training, internal training and work always straightforward.

Besides a general lack of information and awareness of the scheme, little evidence is provided to companies on potential benefits of Type 1. It is not easy for an individual company to figure out the costs and the benefits, due to the structure and the variety of ways of organising the scheme (Box 3). Box 3. Logic and organisation of Type 1

Type 1 is offered as alternative (alongside school-based education) or complementary (in combination with school-based education) way of organising VET programmes (or their practical component) and allowing learners to achieve VET qualifications. Any VET programme, within a range of selected qualifications, may be organised fully or partially as a Type 1 as long as the school and/or learner finds a suitable placement in a company. Learners may attend the whole programme or only part of it in Type 1 (the other part being school-based).

There is great variation in the duration of the scheme, ranging from six months to three or four years, and also within sectors and occupations.

To date, due to the lack of unique guidelines and apprenticeship-specific curricula, Type 1 has been organised and set up mostly on a case-by-case basis, with high implementation costs and risk of fragmentation.

Source: Cedefop.

While financial incentives are usually considered sufficient by companies, non-financial incentives are not, although they would ‘make the difference’ in a decision to offer a Type 1. Such factors could include trust in the apprentice’s education and training institution, and where they will attend the external formal training; the apprentice’s personal attitudes and commitment; and procedural simplification, along with more and better services to companies to activate a Type 1 and implement its training component.

Executive summary

(22)

1.1.4. Training contents, learning outcomes and delivery

Due to the logic and organisation of Type 1 (Box 3), there are no unique guidelines on curriculum organisation, on the final examination, and on how to adapt curricula for school-based programmes and VET qualifications to the apprentice’s individual training plan.

The quality of in-company training delivery is a concern. First, it is often difficult to adapt apprentice training to company work processes and organisation, especially in cases of unexpected events during the contract. Second, in-company training is generally aligned with the individual company’s needs, rather than with the local labour market or the sector. Third, the most common mode of delivery is ‘on-the-job training under supervision’, although apprentices in micro and small companies generally report no distinction between training and ordinary work. SMEs may also not be able to develop all technical skills identified in the individual training plan, which the education and training institution may not cover, leading to potential gaps in expected learning outcomes.

A final factor is the overload on the education and training institutions, which bear most of the burden for the design and implementation of Type 1, particularly when the employer is a micro or small company, or when cooperation between companies and education and training institutions is not sufficiently stable and deep.

1.2. Main areas of intervention

The review identified four areas for intervention and, for each, suggestions for action. These do not necessarily reflect the opinions of all stakeholders involved in the review or of the country’s decision-makers.

(a) The logic of apprenticeship Type 1.

The gradual development of Type 1 should naturally converge towards an approach to apprenticeship as a distinct type of VET or VET programme, rather than as a mode of training/learning that is alternative (alongside based education) or complementary (in combination with school-based education) to VET programmes.

(b) A unified national governance structure at national level.

A permanent central coordinating body, with the full participation of social partners, may be created, reporting to the Ministry of Education and Ministry of Labour. Its functions should be overall steering and

(23)

21

coordination of the Type 1 system, also ensuring the link with decision-makers, and of strategic support to Type 1 implementation.

(c) Distinguishing features of apprenticeship Type 1.

Two scenarios can be envisaged in the medium and long term, with the former anticipating and preparing the paradigm change envisaged by the latter. The ‘continuity scenario’ still refers to an employment paradigm: the definition of Type 1 is one of an employment contract leading to a formal educational qualification, as per the current legal framework, although with some adjustments or clarifications to Type 1 legal regulation. Under the ‘paradigm change scenario’, the employment paradigm is replaced by an education paradigm. Type 1 would acquire a new legal status: it would become a specific/distinct type of education and training pathway (equivalent to school-based pathways) leading to a formal qualification or diploma which involves a contract between learner and employer. (d) Company involvement.

Employers would have access to examples of cost-benefit analysis simulating potential advantages and disadvantages of apprenticeship training. A set of non-financial incentives could encourage company engagement and readiness to offer Type 1 placements: ready-to-use toolkits and instruments, training models and methods for in-company training, and systematic support in practical implementation of the apprenticeship contract, including training for tutors. Although financial incentives seem not to be the main reason why companies choose or not to engage in Type 1, their effectiveness could be periodically assessed and revised, for example by introducing performance-based financial incentives or for the purpose of supporting micro and small companies. More widespread and detailed information and awareness-raising actions are recommended.

This TCR is addressed first to the national stakeholders, those represented in the steering group, the interviewees, and to a broader audience. However, read in conjunction with the publications on Cedefop TCRs in Greece, Lithuania, Malta and Slovenia this report will provide valuable insights for those interested in learning in greater depth about the experience of other countries in setting up and/or reforming apprenticeships.

Executive summary

(24)

(25)

23

Executive summary

1. Introduction

(26)

CHAPTER 1

Introduction

In July 2015, the Italian Ministry of Labour and Social Policies and Cedefop launched the thematic country review (TCR) on apprenticeships in Italy. This was in the context of the 2015 reform of employment contracts (8_{), which also}

introduced significant changes to the apprenticeship system (9_{). The Ministry}

nominated a steering group (10_{) appointing representatives of the most}

relevant stakeholder groups governing and managing the apprenticeship system (see Chapter 2 and Annex 2).

The steering group expressed a clear interest in focusing the review on apprenticeship Type 1 (11_{) (Type 1). This is a scheme (}12_{) for 15 to 25 year-olds,}

leading to a vocational qualification or diploma. The aim was to understand what was needed to make Type 1 implementation more successful. To this end, the review would take into account the implementation of Type 1 prior to the 2015 reform (old Type 1), the reforms introduced in 2015, the early experiences with the reformed type 1, and international practices. According to the steering group, the objective of the TCR was also to develop Type 1 in relation to the dual system (13_{) to overcome separation of education and}

training from the world of work. (8_{) Legislative Decree 81/2015, 15 June 2015.}

(9_{) Interministerial Decree MLPS/MIUR, 12 October 2015.}

(10_{) According to Cedefop’s methodology, the role of the steering group is to guide the TCR,}

to determine the priority areas, to discuss and provide feedback on intermediary products and results, and to take note of the lessons and recommendations coming out of the TCR to inform policy development in the country on apprenticeships.

(11_{) Of the three types available in Italy.}

(12_{) For the purposes of this report, an apprenticeship scheme is a set of rules and regulations}

about how this type of training should be designed, delivered, assessed, certified and governed. Such schemes can be applicable to different training programmes (dependent on aspects such programme sector and duration) and result in different types of qualifications (according to aspects such as level and name). An apprenticeship programme is an inventory of activities, content and/or methods implemented to achieve the objectives of an apprenticeship scheme (acquiring knowledge, skills and/or competences), organised in a logical sequence over a specified period of time. There are usually various apprenticeship programmes organised under one apprenticeship scheme. This means that apprenticeship programmes can take different forms, as in the duration and form of alternation.

(13_{) Dual system refers to a vocational training model based on the alternance between school/}

training and work, as well as strong cooperation between training institutions and companies. The Law 107/2015 and the Legislative Decree 81/2015 support the development of a dual system in Italy.

NEXT CONTENTS

(27)

25 CHAPTER 1

Introduction

This report includes the key findings, conclusions and recommendations of the TCR. Chapter 2 offers a short description of the rationale and methodology of Cedefop TCRs on apprenticeships. Chapter 3 provides background information about the Italian labour market context and an overview of the VET system and of apprenticeship schemes in Italy. Chapter 4 presents the main key findings (facts, figures and stakeholder views) of the TCR and the relative challenges for Type 1, as elaborated during the analytical work. Chapter 5 offers suggestions for improvement of the Type 1 in terms of policy- and practice-oriented solutions in selected areas of intervention.

NEXT CONTENTS

(28)

(29)

27 CHAPTER 1 Introduction

2. TCR on apprenticeships:

rationale and

methodology

(30)

CHAPTER 2

TCR on apprenticeships:

rationale and methodology

The main objectives of Cedefop’s thematic country review on apprenticeships are as follows:

(a) at national level, in cooperation with national stakeholders, to carry out in- depth review of apprenticeship in the country, to identify its specific strengths and challenges and present a set of policy recommendations for ensuring quality apprenticeships;

(b) at European level, to increase the evidence base to support policy- and decision-makers in European countries at different levels in designing and implementing policies and measures for developing and/or improving quality apprenticeships; also to support comparison across countries.

Identifying key national policy challenges as a focus of the analysis and evaluation is essential to meaningful policy recommendations. These recommendations aim at helping the country to establish its apprenticeship system and its gradually expanding knowledge of contextual factors determining or hampering the success of apprenticeship initiatives.

Cedefop applied a review methodology, specifically designed for the project, using three key pillars:

(a) a common analytical framework;

(b) an inclusive, participatory and collaborative approach and policy learning;

(c) an evolving and iterative approach.

The analytical framework (Annex 1) includes characteristic features that are present to different extents and in different combinations in existing (well- functioning) systems of apprenticeship. The framework does not offer a single recommended model but is based on several models and systems that work. The features identified in the framework have a purely operational function and are in no way to be interpreted as necessary conditions. Nor is the framework an exhaustive list; it may evolve as the review progresses.

The analytical framework comprises 10 areas of analysis that are further translated into more detailed explanatory descriptors. These areas were

NEXT CONTENTS

(31)

29 CHAPTER 2

TCR on apprenticeships: rationale and methodology

used throughout the review as a frame of reference for the data collection instruments and process, analysis and reporting.

The inclusive, participatory and collaborative approach is organised on two levels.

(a) Steering of the review and validation.

The Ministry of Labour and Social Policies (MLSP), nominated a steering group with wide representation: the MLPS (14_{), the Ministry of Education,}

University and Research (MIUR), the regions, trade unions and employers’ organisations, the National Institute for the Analysis of Public Policies (INAPP, former Institute for the Development of Vocational Training of Workers, ISFOL), and representatives of VET providers (15_{). The role of}

the steering group was to guide the TCR, to determine priority areas, to discuss and provide feedback on intermediary products and results, and to take note of the recommendations of the TCR with a view to informing national policy developments. The steering group gathered six times during the TCR process: a launch event in July 2015; a meeting to share round 1 intermediate results (May 2016); three validation meetings (December 2015, November 2016, April 2017), and one follow-up event (July 2017).

(b) Stakeholder involvement.

Different stages of the review involved a broader range of actors representing national stakeholders. More specifically, individuals and groups of stakeholders took part in in-depth discussions on the strengths, weaknesses, areas for improvement, solutions and policy, institutional, and organisational implications for apprenticeship systems in the country. During the implementation, consultations with stakeholders took place in three consecutive rounds. A total of 201 individuals were surveyed during the TCR, 12 of whom participated more than once as they were also interviewed in round tables and group interviews (Table 1).

(14_{) From January 2017, the representatives of the Ministry of Labour were employed by the newly}

formed National Agency for Active Labour Policies (ANPAL). (15_{) See Annex 2 for a list of the steering group members.}

NEXT CONTENTS

(32)

Table 1. Number of interviews, by stakeholder group

Group of stakeholders Persons interviewed

Apprentices/students 30

VET-schools (directors, deputy directors) 26

VET-school tutors/teachers 28

Companies (directors or HR managers) 24

In-company tutors/trainers 23

Public employment service operators 2

Labour consultants 6

Regions and regional executive agencies 5 Regional offices of the Ministry of Education, University

and Research

5

Social partners (at regional level) 31

Social partners (at national level) 11

Ministry of Labour and Social Policies (MLPS) and executive agencies (ANPAL and INAPP)

4 Ministry of Education, University and Research (MIUR) 2

Experts 4

Total 201

Source: Cedefop.

An iterative and evolving approach was applied, where each round had its own specific objectives but it also informed the following round(s). The first-round of consultations took place from April 2016 to June 2016. This was used to collect factual information from stakeholders at implementation level (practitioners and beneficiaries). A total of 139 interviews were conducted in the first survey round amongst apprentices, VET agencies and school directors and tutors, company directors, in-company tutors and trainers, public employment services and labour consultants. Building on the findings of the first round, a second round of consultations was carried out in the autumn of 2016. In total 41 individuals were interviewed, including stakeholders operating at the regional level (regions and regional agencies, MIUR regional offices, trade unions and employers’ associations). This second round was used to diagnose better and then discuss challenges identified in the previous survey round; it covered their current and (possible) future

(33)

31 CHAPTER 2

role in transforming Type 1 apprenticeship from an episodic experience into a systematic pathway for youth access to a VET qualification and the labour market in Italy. Some of the stakeholders (12) interviewed in the second round of interviews were invited to participate in two roundtables, organised in Veneto and Lombardy. In these two regions, a sample of companies was also interviewed through an online survey, resulting in responses from 313 companies). The third round of consultations took place from December 2016 to March 2017 at national level; it surveyed 23 individuals through one roundtable with social partner representatives, one group interview with institutional stakeholders, and interviews with experts, to discuss possible solutions and recommendations.

The outcomes of these three survey rounds are integrated in the relevant sections of this report: although there is no precise correspondence, findings from rounds 1 and 2 were the basis for Chapter 4 and findings from round 3 were used as input for Chapter 5.

(34)

(35)

33 CHAPTER 2

3. Context

(36)

CHAPTER 3

Context

3.1. The young in the labour market

Key labour market figures show that the Italian performance presents critical challenges as compared to the EU-28 average. The 2008 economic crisis had a severe impact on the Italian economy. According to Eurostat data, the adult unemployment rate (aged 25 to 64) in Italy almost doubled from 5% in 2007 to 10.2% in 2016, becoming increasingly higher than the EU-28 average (16_{). The adult unemployment rate was below the EU average until}

2011 and higher since 2013 but this could also be largely explained by the low participation of the adult population in the Italian labour market.

Figure 1. Youth and adult unemployment rates in Italy and the EU-28,

2007-16 (%)

(16_{) Unemployment rates by sex, age and nationality. Last update: 5 July 2017.}

NB: Percentage numbers in the trend line are provided for young people (15 to 24) and adults (25 to 64) in Italy.

Source: Eurostat, EU labour force survey, 2017 data, online data code [lfsa_urgan].

50 37.5 25 12.5 0 % 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 5 20.4 5.6 21.2 6.5 25.3 7 27.9 7 29.2 9 35.3 10.4 40 10.8 42.7 10.2 40.3 10.2 37.8

EU-28 youth EU-28 adults IT youth IT adults NEXT

(37)

35 CHAPTER 3

Context

Compared to adults and the EU average, youth unemployment is more serious. The unemployment rate for ages 15 to 24 increased from 20.4% in 2007 to a peak of 42.7% in 2014; only a slight reduction was observed in the following two years (37.8% in 2016). Although the level of youth unemployment was above the EU-28, the overall trend was similar in Italy and the EU until 2011. From 2011 until 2014 the growth in unemployment was much higher in Italy than in the EU, before returning to a similar (decreasing) trend from 2014. In spite of the slight reduction over the past years, youth unemployment still remains about 19% higher in Italy as compared to the EU average in 2016.

Policy-makers are trying to increase the employability of the young by reforming and promoting VET, particularly work-based learning. As part of this activity, apprenticeship has been promoted as the main route to the labour market. Empirical evidence indicates that VET is a relevant factor for labour market integration: the employment rates of upper secondary (17₎

VET graduates, both in Italy and in the EU-28 average, outperform those of graduates from general education (Figure 2). In 2016, the employment rate of VET graduates (aged 20 to 34) was 8.4% higher than that of graduates from general education (64.10% vs 55.70%); the difference was 5.7% in the EU-28 (78.10% vs. 72.40%).

Figure 2. General and vocational education graduates: employment

rates in Italy and the EU-28, ages 20 to 34, 2014-16 (%)

(17_{) Programmes at ISCED level 3 and 4, upper secondary to non-tertiary education.}

90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 % EU-28 2014 2015 2016 EU-28 EU-28 IT IT IT

Source: Cedefop, based on Eurostat, EU labour force survey, 2017 data, online data code [edat_lfse_24].

Vocational General

NEXT CONTENTS

(38)

From 2014 to 2016 this employment rate ‘premium’ for VET graduates increased in Italy (from 6% to 8.4%), while slightly decreasing in the EU average (from 6.2% to 5.7%). This might suggest that VET provides a special advantage as compared to general education in youth employability in Italy. Participation in training by enterprises in Italy is generally low. One reason for this is their comparatively small size and this is particularly true when it comes to apprenticeships. European data show that large enterprises are more likely to offer apprenticeships than their small and medium-sized counterparts (18_).

In Italy, micro enterprises (zero to nine employees) account for about 46% of all employees and produce almost 30% of the total added value (Table 2). Because of their limited capacity for long-term investment in skills and training initiatives, small enterprises tend to focus more on qualifying their existing workforce rather than on taking on new entrants through apprenticeships or similar schemes.

It is also known that innovative firms require a more qualified staff able to deal with new technologies and production processes. European data (19_{) again show that innovative activity increases with the size of companies}

and specifically the number of employees. Table 2 presents the shares of enterprises with innovative activity in the core innovative branches in Italy. Within this category, about 85% of enterprises with 250+ employees had innovative activity in the reference period, while this applies only to 45% of firms with 10 to 49 employees. It is apparent that industry size structure in Italy is likely to affect negatively VET initiatives, in general, and apprenticeships in particular.

(18_{) In 2010, at EU level, 44% of large enterprises offered apprenticeships, against 31% of medium,}

and 22% of small enterprises (Eurostat CVTS 4, no data available for micro enterprises). (19_{) Eurostat, community innovation survey (2014).}

(39)

37 CHAPTER 3

Context

Table 2. Italy: enterprises by number of employees: number of enterprises;

number of persons employed; value added; innovative enterprises

Number of employees 0 to 9 10 to 49 50 to 249 250+ Total A Number of enterprises 2013 3 581 269 167 711 18 771 3 093 3 770 844 B % enterprise of total 2013 95.0 4.4 0.5 0.1 C Value added at factor costs 2013 184 26.2 137 832.4 108 558.1 203 398.8 634 415.5 D % value added at factor costs 2013 29.1 21.7 17.1 32.1 E Number of persons employed 2013 6 684 596 2 980 201 1 811 712 2 931 398 14 407 907 F % employees 2013 46.4 20.7 12.6 20.3 G % of innovative enterprises 2012-14 (*) NA 45 68.2 84.8 48.7

(*) Share refers to NACE B-M73_INN innovative core activities (Com.Reg. 995/2012). Innovative enterprises are those that had innovation activities during the period 2012-14, including enterprises with current and abandoned activities. Enterprises that had innovation activities during the period under review, regardless of whether the activity resulted in the implementation of an innovation, are innovation-active.

Source: Cedefop, based on Eurostat, Structural business statistic, 2017 data, online data code [sbs_sc_sca_r2] for

columns (A) to (F); Eurostat, Company innovation survey, 2014 data, online data code [inn_cis9_bas] for column (G).

3.2. Vocational education and training

for the young

The Italian vocational education and training (VET) system offers programmes at upper secondary, post-secondary and tertiary level. It is managed by the Ministry of Education, University and Research (under the State education system) and by the regions (under the regional VET system).

3.2.1. VET at upper secondary level

VET at upper secondary level is provided under the regional system (istruzione

e formazione professionale, IeFP) and under the State education system

(40)

(Istruzione tecnica e professionale). On completion of lower secondary education, young people at age 14 may enrol in one of the following upper secondary VET programmes:

(a) five-year programmes leading to technical or professional education diplomas, under the responsibility of the Ministry of Education (EQF 4); (b) four-year programmes leading to vocational diplomas managed by the

regions (EQF 4);

(c) three-year programmes leading to vocational qualifications managed by the regions (EQF 3).

These qualifications and diplomas are included in the National repository

of education and training qualifications and of vocational qualifications

(national repository from here on) (20_).

There is permeability across VET programmes and also with the general education system. On completion of a three-year vocational qualification, it is possible to attend one additional year leading to a four-year vocational diploma. This latter allows enrolling in the fifth year of the State education system and sitting the State exam for a general, technical or professional education diploma (21_).

3.2.1.1. Upper secondary VET under the State education system (22₎

The actors responsible for VET under State education at upper secondary level are:

(a) the Ministry of Education, University and Research (MIUR). This defines the framework (access criteria and curricula) for the five-year programmes (20_{) The National repository of education and training qualifications and of vocational qualifications}

is the national reference framework for the certification of competences. It is organised in the following sections: university, secondary school, VET, national framework of regional qualifications, apprenticeship, professions. The repository was developed through the progressive standardisation of existing regional inventories and it is still under development. In early 2017 only two sections were accessible, the one on IeFP and the national framework of regional qualifications. The repository is available at: http://nrpitalia.isfol.it/sito_standard/ sito_demo/atlante_repertori.php

(21_{) According to Legislative Decree 226/2005, students from the regional VET system can}

attend the fifth year in upper secondary technical and vocational schools managed by the Ministry of Education only if they have a VET diploma acquired after a four-year regional VET programme. Admission to the fifth year can take place after a process of credit recognition defined by each school; the legislation does not delineate any common instructions and each school can decide how to recognise credits for the access to the fifth-year class. The school’s commission evaluates students and decides if they can be admitted to the fifth class and complete the upper secondary education cycle by sitting the State exam.

(22_{) At upper secondary level, the State education system also includes general education,}

five-year programmes delivered in high schools.

(41)

39 CHAPTER 3

Context

leading to technical or professional education diplomas. It also allocates financial resources to the providers (upper secondary technical and vocational schools), which cover expenses for teaching, managing and auxiliary staff, in order to guarantee the ‘right-duty’ to education and training (Diritto-Dovere all’Istruzione e alla Formazione) (23_);

(b) social partners are consulted in VET policy-making and collaborate in designing and organising labour market policies. Collective bargaining is a key means to this end, both at the national and decentralised (local or company) levels;

(c) technical schools (istituti tecnici) and vocational schools (istituti professionali) provide five-year programmes leading to technical and vocational education diplomas, respectively. Technical schools aim at providing skills, knowledge and competences to carry out technical and administrative tasks. Vocational schools aim at providing practical preparation to carry out qualified tasks in professional fields of national interest.

Curricula are designed at regional level by the schools, based on national learning outcomes established by the MIUR. Directives from the MIUR defined the learning outcomes for technical school programmes (24_{) and two}

for vocational school programmes (25_{). MIUR directives also set the annual}

allocation of hours per subject. Schools then have the autonomy to adapt a maximum of 20% of the total number of hours of the curriculum, allocating this time to learning such as laboratory-based activities or new courses. Box 4. Law 107/2015: reform of the State upper secondary education

system

In 2015, the Buona Scuola school reform (Law 107/2015) sought integration of practical training in school curricula, making alternance a structural and compulsory training method for both VET and general education, with a view to increasing students’ skills and employability. The school provides students with the opportunity to acquire basic, soft and professional skills at the workplace, aiming at successful school-to-work transitions.

(23_{) Italian citizens under 18 are entitled to the so-called right/duty to education and training for}

12 years or until they achieve a qualification by the age of 18. Article 2, Paragraph 1c of Law 53/2003 and Legislative Decrees 76/2005 and 226/2005.

(24_{) MIUR Directive 57/2010 and MIUR Directive 4/2012.}

(25_{) MIUR Directive 65/2010 and MIUR Directive 5/2012.}

(42)

The law introduced compulsory school-to-work alternance in upper secondary schools. Students enrolled in the last three years of technical and vocational programmes have to complete a minimum 400 hours of in-company learning; students enrolled in the last three years of general education programmes have to complete at least 200 hours of in-company learning.

The reform also foresees the possibility of agreements for students to conduct practical activities outside the school with professional, cultural and sport associations.

Work-based-learning activities can take place when there are no teaching activities (such as during summer) and it is also possible to undertake them abroad. Other innovative elements of the reform are:

• the creation of an online national registry of companies offering alternance placements at the Chamber of Commerce, where all companies can register for free (26_{); the registry should work as a matching tool supporting cooperation}

between businesses and schools;

• secondary schools can organise training courses in occupational health and safety, for students in alternance activities; schools provide general training certified through a certificate of attendance and a final test, while companies are in charge of providing sector-specific training;

• the financial resources for the schools to carry out alternance come from the MIUR.

Source: Cedefop.

3.2.1.2. Upper secondary VET under the regional system (IeFP)

The three-year vocational qualifications and the four-year diplomas are under regional competence (IeFP) but are included in the national repository (see footnote 20) and recognised at national and European levels. These titles are characterised by a high degree of flexibility and include a mix of activities, such as laboratories and traineeships. The IeFP programmes are provided either by the regional training centres accredited at regional level in respect of national minimum standards, or, if foreseen by the region, by schools in a subsidiarity process. In this way, schools (State education system) can also decide to take part in the regional VET system, in addition to their participation in the State system (point (f) below).

(26₎_{http://scuolalavoro.registroimprese.it}

(43)

41 CHAPTER 3

Context

The actors responsible for upper secondary VET under the regional competence are:

(a) the MIUR defines the minimum standards of IeFP provision in terms of general and technical-specific competences for the three and four-year programmes (27_);

(b) the MLPS distributes financial resources to the regions for VET provision, including Type 1 implementation, and supports/monitors its implementation through its agencies, the ANPAL and the INAPP;

(c) the Permanent Conference for relationships between the State, the regions and the autonomous provinces (State-Regions Conference from here on) takes national level decisions on VET provision, including Type 1 implementation at regional level. The State-Regions Conference played a key role in stimulating and shaping the national repository (see footnote 20). In 2011 and 2012 this body selected the 22 VET qualifications and the 21 VET diplomas for which each region and autonomous province can set up VET programmes that could also be offered as Type 1. For each qualification, the Conference defined the learning outcomes (OSA, Obiettivi specifici di apprendimento) expected at the end of the respective training programme;

(d) regions and autonomous provinces (Regions/AA.PP from here on) are in charge of planning and organising regional VET programmes. They finance those through the Ministry of Labour’s and their own resources. Regions/AA.PP may also: define additional qualifications or diplomas to be delivered also as Type 1; define additional specialisations (in Italian ‘indirizzi’) to the nationally defined qualifications and diplomas; adapt those qualifications/diplomas to local labour market needs and peculiarities, by including additional competences taken from regional repositories; these are in substitution or integration of those envisaged in the standard qualification/diploma, but without adding training hours. All the regional adaptations are not recognised at national level;

(e) social partners also play an important role by participating in regional bilateral committees (28_{) and by signing decentralised (local and}

company-level) agreements, also on Type 1;

(f) publicly and privately accredited regional training centres provide training for the regional VET programmes. However, in many regions the technical and vocational schools operating in the State VET system may (27_{) As per Legislative Decree 226/2005.}

(28_{) Commissioni paritetiche territoriali.}

(44)

also provide training leading to vocational qualifications and diplomas. Regions can adopt two ‘models of subsidiarity’ (29_):

(i) integrative subsidiarity: students enrolled in five-year vocational programmes can also obtain a three-year vocational qualification at the end of the third year;

(ii) complementary subsidiarity: students enrolled in vocational schools can acquire a vocational qualification or a vocational diploma (IeFP titles) by following classes created ad hoc in vocational schools. Four regions opted for this type of subsidiarity: Friuli Venezia-Giulia, Lombardy, Sicily and Veneto.

3.2.2. VET at post-secondary and tertiary levels

After the upper secondary level, learners may enrol in the following programmes with vocational orientation:

(a) higher technical education and training courses (HTC), Istruzione e

Formazione Tecnica Superiore (IFTS): one year post-secondary

non-academic programmes which lead to a high technical specialisation certificate (Certificato di specializzazione tecnica superiore, EQF 4); (b) higher technical institutes (HTI), Istruzione Tecnica Superiore (ITS): two-

or three-year post-secondary non-academic programmes which lead to a high-level technical diploma (Diploma di tecnico superiore, EQF 5).

Regions have exclusive competence in planning the training offer for higher technical education and training courses (HTC). HTC are aimed at developing professional specialisations at post-secondary level, meeting the requirements of the regional labour markets. They are structured in 20 specialisation areas defined at national level, which are described in terms of minimum education standards by the MIUR and the MLPS (30_{). Those areas may be further defined}

by the regions in relation to local labour market characteristics. The HTC are financed by regional resources, mostly the European Social Fund and resources allocated through periodic calls for projects. The duration of an HTC programme is 800 to 1 000 hours (two semesters), which include practical and theoretical training and at least 30% of the time spent in a company as trainee. Experts from the world of work and professions should be at least 50% of the teaching staff. HTC have a minimum of four partners belonging to:

(a) regional training centres; (b) schools;

(29_{) Presidential Decree 87/2010.}

(30_{) Interministerial Decree MLPS/MIUR of 7 February 2013.}

(45)

43 CHAPTER 3

Context

(c) universities;

(d) enterprises or public/private subjects.

The higher technical institutes (HTI) are non-academic training opportunities at tertiary level. The MIUR and the MLPS defined 29 national occupational profiles and general provisions, such as those for assessment and skill certification (31_{). The HTI system covers six strategic technological}

areas of specialisation (32_{). The duration of an HTI programme is 1 800}

to 2 000 hours: at least 30% of these hours have to be spent on-the-job (internship). At least 50% of training has to be provided by experts from the world of work and professions. HTI are formally set up as foundations with minimum composition of:

(a) a regional training, centre either private or public, based in the same province as the foundation;

(b) a school; (c) a university;

(d) an enterprise belonging to the sector covered by the HTI;

(e) a local authority (municipality, province, metropolitan city or mountain community).

Currently, 86 HTI foundations operate at national level offering 363 programmes (MIUR, 2016). In March 2017, 8 400 people were enrolled in HTI. Box 5. The higher technical institutes in the Buona Scuola reform

The Buona Scuola reform also introduced a set of measures to boost the HTI: the share of performance-related funding to be 30% in 2016; students with only a four-year upper secondary vocational qualification also to be able to access the HTI after completing a ‘foundation year’; increase in permeability between the HTI and academically-oriented higher education; and simplified administrative procedures. A quality-rewarding financing model for the HTI was introduced with 10% of funding allocated based on a set of performance indicators (Law 107/2015).

Source: Cedefop.

(31_{) Interministerial Decree MLPS/MIUR of 7 September 2011, complemented by Interministerial}

Decree of 7 February 2013.

(32_{) The areas are: energy efficiency, sustainable mobility, new technologies for life, new}

technologies for Made in Italy (mechanics, fashion, food, housing, business services), innovative technologies for cultural goods and services, ICT.

(46)

The Italian tertiary level of education includes also university and other non-university programmes (such as higher VET for arts and music, Alta

formazione artistica e musicale, AFAM, EQF 5 to 8) (Cedefop, 2014).

3.3. Apprenticeship schemes in Italy

3.3.1. Overview

There are three main apprenticeship schemes in place:

(a) Type 1 apprenticeship (Type 1), apprenticeship for vocational qualification and diploma, upper secondary education diploma and high technical specialisation certificate (33_{): this covers VET programmes at upper}

secondary level (currently there are 21 qualifications and 22 diplomas codified as nationally valid and included in the national repository) and post-secondary level;

(b) Type 2 apprenticeship (Type 2), occupation-oriented apprenticeship (34_{): this}

does not correspond to any education level and leads to an occupational qualification. This is a qualification recognised by the relevant national sectoral collective agreement applied in the hiring company, outside the VET system (2 075 qualifications reported in the national repository); (c) Type 3 apprenticeship (Type 3), higher training/education and research

apprenticeship (35_{). This includes two sub-types:}

(i) higher training/education apprenticeships leading to university degrees, HTI diplomas, and doctoral degrees corresponding to the tertiary level;

(ii) apprenticeship for research activities leads to a contractual qualification, which is not valid within the education and training system.

During an apprenticeship contract the learner alternates learning periods at an education and training institution (regional training centre/schools/ universities) and a company.

Type 1 and Type 3 for higher training/education apprenticeships are associated with a formal education and training programme, while Type 2 and Type 3 for research activities are not.

(33_{) Apprendistato per la qualifica e il diploma professionale, il diploma di istruzione secondaria} superiore e il certificato di specializzazione tecnica superiore.

(34_{) Apprendistato professionalizzante.}

(35_{) Apprendistato di alta formazione e ricerca.}